Soil adherence to human skin

Anderson E, Browne N, Duletsky S, Ramig J, Warn T (1985) Development of statistical distributions or ranges of standard factors used in exposure assessments. Final report. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment. EPA Contract No. 68-02-3997. Work Assignment No. 2. PB 85-242667Google Scholar

California Department of Health Services (1986) The development of applied action levels for soil contact: a scenario for the exposure of humans to soil in a residential setting. Toxic Substances Control Division. Department of Health Services. State of California. Sacramento, CAGoogle Scholar

Gunther FA, Carman GE, and Iwata Y (1976) Worker reentry safety in citrus groves. Department of Entomology, University of California, Riverside. California Department of Food and Agriculture Contract No. 4288. (as cited in Knaak et al. 1989)Google Scholar

Iwata Y (1980) Minimizing occupational exposure to pesticides: reeentry field data — a recapitulation. Residue Rev 75:127–147 (as cited in Knaak et al. 1989)PubMedGoogle Scholar

Kimbrough RD, Falk H, Stehr P (1984) Health implications of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzodioxin (TCDD) contamination of residential soil. J Toxicol Environ Health 14:47–93PubMedGoogle Scholar

Knaak JB, Iwata Y, and Maddy KT (1989) The worker hazard posed by reentry into pesticide-treated foliage: development of safe re-entry times with emphasis on chlorthiophos and carbosulfan.In: Paustenbach DJ (ed), The risk assessment of environmental and human health hazards: a textbook of case studies. New York: John Wiley & Sons, pp.797–842Google Scholar

Lepow ML, Bruckman L, Gillette M, Markowitz S, Rubino R, Kapish J (1975) Investigations into sources of lead in the environment of urban children. Environ Res 10:415–426PubMedGoogle Scholar

Lund CC, Browder NC (1944) The estimation of areas of burns. Surg Gynecol Obstet 79:352–358Google Scholar

McDougal WS, Slade CL, Pruitt BA (1978) Comprehensive manual of surgical specialties. Vol. 2. Manual of Burns. New York: Springer VerlagGoogle Scholar

Nigg HN, Stamper JH, and Queen RM (1984) The development and use of a universal model to predict tree crop harvester pesticide exposure. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 45:182–186 (as cited in Knaak et al. 1989)PubMedGoogle Scholar

Poiger H, Schlatter C (1980) Influence of solvents and adsorbents on dermal and intestinal absorption of TCDD. Fd Cosmet Toxicol 18:477–481Google Scholar

Que Hee SS, Peace B, Scott CS, Boyle JR, Bornschein RL, Hammond PB (1985) Evolution of efficient methods to sample lead sources, such as house dust and hand dust, in the homes of children. Environ Res 38:77–95PubMedGoogle Scholar

Roels HA, Buchet JP, Lauwerys RR, Bruaux P, Claeys-Thoreau F, Lafontaine A, Verduyn G (1980) Exposure to lead by oral and the pulmonary routes of children living in the vicinity of a primary lead smelter. Environ Res 22:81–94PubMedGoogle Scholar

Shu H, Teitelbaum P, Webb AS, Marple L, Brunck B, Dei Rossi D, Murray FJ, Paustenbach D (1988) Bioavailability of soil-bound TCDD: dermal bioavailability in the rat. Fundamental Appl Toxicol 10:335–343Google Scholar

Umbreit TH, Hesse EJ, Gallo MA (1986) Bioavailability of dioxin in soil from a 2,4,5-T manufacturing site. Science 232:497–499PubMedGoogle Scholar

USEPA (1984) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Pesticide assessment guidelines subdivision K, exposure: reentry protection. Springfield, Virginia: National Technical Information Service. NTIS Publication No. PB85-120962Google Scholar

USEPA (1987) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. National dioxin study. Washington, DC: Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. EPA/530-SW-87-025Google Scholar

Zweig G, Leffingwell JT, and Popendorf W (1985) The relationship between dermal pesticide exposure by fruit harvesters and dislodgeable foliage residues. J Environ Sci Health B20 (1): 27–59Google Scholar